Photoshop CS3 Windows; basic new user info, e.g. Vista64, activation, service packs, tips/tricks, tutorials, add-ins?

[QuixoticOne]

I'll be getting Photoshop CS3 for Windows shortly.

I'm just looking for some general tips on its setup / maintenance.

Are there big service packs you can download, or just a bunch of individual files?

Is there a more efficient way to download them all (ftp vs web or CD images of cumulative updates or whatever)?

I know it wasn't really optimized for running under Vista 64 bit when it was created; I'm wondering how well it works for people in practice given all the patches that are now available (SP1 for Vista, who knows what for PS CS3)?

What are your favorite links for tips / tricks / tutorials / filters / add-ins / whatever?

How does its activation work with respect to PC portability?
There are two different PCs I use, one desk is much better situated for printing and photo viewing (color calibrated monitor, decent printer, better light, etc.) etc. but has a somewhat underpowered Pentium PC without much memory etc.
I have another quad-core system with 8GB RAM / Vista 64, etc. that is the best performance / capability choice for doing "heavy" tasks on but it is not at all conveniently located for doing day-to-day light project work.
I know in the old days lots of similar software could be run with a license manager "server" and then the individual PC that "checked out" the license for use at any given moment could "float" to any desktop one wanted to use on the LAN.
Can CS3 Photoshop Windows do something like that?
Otherwise is there an easy way to "activate" and "unactivate" a given system so that maybe every week or two it'd be easy enough to change which PC/desk I use depending on project complexity / requirements?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Krioni]

Bumping this up because I may also be getting CS3 and would like to hear the answer to the original questions.

Is it actually worth getting CS3 for a basic user if I already have Lightroom?

 

[alkemyst]

Creative Suite is not for basic users.

I have CS2 at work and elements as well. I find myself firing up elements more often because it's quicker.

 

[Krioni]

Originally posted by: alkemyst
Creative Suite is not for basic users.

I have CS2 at work and elements as well. I find myself firing up elements more often because it's quicker.

Good to know... maybe i'll pass on CS3 and just get Elements. Thanks for the tip.

 

[KeithP]

You can activate a copy of PhotoShop on up to two machines. It is relatively easy to deactivate a copy on a machine without uninstalling the software. I don't know what, if anything, would happen if you frequently activated and deactivated a copy but since you only mention two machines you shouldn't run into that problem. Adobe has a built-in updater for its applications so you shouldn't have to worry about downloading updates.

Here is a link to an Adobe Tech Note on optimizing performance for XP and Vista:
http://kb.adobe.com/selfservic...lId=kb401088&sliceId=2

-KeithP

 

[alkemyst]

You should make sure elements will do what you need first.

On Adobe there are the lists that show what each do.

I didn't know photoshop could be on two machines like the Full suite can...that's nice to know. Some idiot here insisted we needed 4 copies of it for 4 machines.

 

[KeithP]

Well the idea is that while you can install the software and activate on two machines, only one is allowed to be in use at a time.

-Keith

 

[alkemyst]

when we spoke to their tech support they said the licensing was concurrent and not like Office where you can install on two machines but only use one at any time.

We haven't had the need yet to deploy it to more users.

 

[QuixoticOne]

I found this somewhat outdated but probably still mostly relevant article about comparing Elements and Photoshop:

http://graphicssoft.about.com/.../f/elementscompare.htm

There are also links fo other pages with tips / tutorials et. al.

I've started using the trial version of Photoshop CS3 for a couple of days to get familiar with it.

It is nice they've ostensibly made it easy to use it on a couple of machines depending on need / convenience; my old X2-4400 with 3GB RAM and vanilla hard disc is seeming AWFULLY slow all of a sudden!

Actually mostly it seems like Bridge is the REALLY slow one, it takes HOURS to go through and 'cache' the photos folder I have on that drive (only about 30,000 images), and even when it is operating out of its cache it is MISERABLY slow to scroll around the thumbnail indices of that collection.

And just when I think its done creating the cache after a few hours of indexing it crashes; repeat that process about ten times sequentially and you'll see the joy I've been experiencing with it. Then when I updated to the latest CS3 Bridge update it apparently flushed the cache so I had to start over with all the crashes and slowness. I don't see how people tolerate this bad program?!

Bridge seems like a bad and buggy / slow toy compared to even lots of freeware programs like F-Spot, KPhotoalbum, Faststone, XNView, etc. at least with respect to the thumbnail browsing / tagging / indexing capacities.

Maybe the idea is to get people to buy Lightroom also / instead; I don't know. I thought it'd be a lot more industrial strength in robustness / capacity even if at a somewhat basic level of bells and whistles.

As for Photoshop CS3, it seems OK so far. Not really much in the way of commonly needed features that one couldn't do easily with GIMP or Elements, but it has a few nice more esoteric features which can be handy if one needs them.

I think one of the main points of Photoshop for me isn't so much that I couldn't do the same kinds of things to meet my needs with other programs like Elements / GIMP, it is that there's a pretty large body of published experience with applying photoshop in various ways to draw on. There are lots of books, tutorials, videos, et. al. to teach new users image processing techniques with photoshop, and those resources are handy for new users who aren't that familiar with image processing and who need to easily learn something.

I gather that that's one of the main reasons why one might be better served getting Photoshop vs. Elements; the core capabilities likely exist in both, but you may be less likely to find applicable / efficient documented techniques for a somewhat complex workflow in Elements vs. Photoshop.

It is starting to seem like they've divided up their products (Photoshop, Elements, Bridge, Camera Raw, Lightroom, et. al.) in such a way that one gets some really nice features on one hand and then is left disappointingly / surprisingly lacking in other areas whatever choice one makes.

It seems like before too long they'll have to focus on creating a "best of all worlds" program and then selling that at a lower price than Photoshop has historically commanded. With the advent of DSLRs, high quality personal printers, and powerful multi-core PCs things that were once advanced / professional level like color management, RAW workflows, RIPing, having libraries of tens of thousands of images et. al. are no longer uncommon for even a modest amateur.

 

[alkemyst]

almost all the steps of photoshop would apply to elements, there are some capabilities in photoshop that elements does not have. The idea behind elements is to stop people from ripping an illegal copy of photoshop and give them what they need at an affordable price point.

Most people talk about HAVING to have Photoshop and beyond...this is why we have 4 licenses for the full CS2 suite and one of our associates that just makes flyers is asking for CS3 now. This same associate brags how she has this, AutoCAD, and about $10k in other software at home because her husband's job gives these apps away.

If you aren't making money with it, then the full lineup is a very expensive accessory unless you are pirating.